Policy Brief  

Ensuring All Votes Count: Reducing Rejected Ballots

This brief studies trends in mail ballot rejection rates in 2020 compared to previous years and how different factors, including sets of policies and policy changes, the political environment, and voter outreach, may have contributed to these changes in an extraordinary election year. Our main findings include:

  • Mail ballot rejection rates decreased in most states in 2020 compared to 2018, and a number of states saw a consistent drop from 2016 to 2018 to 2020.
  • Certain states that adapted their voting laws to make mail voting more accessible in 2020, particularly in the South, saw especially pronounced changes in rejection rates.
  • In North Carolina, rejection rates vary from county to county. Previous studies of other states’ rejection rates found similar trends.
  • States that implemented mail ballot policies, including ballot curing, increased ease of access when returning mail ballots at boards of elections, early voting sites, drop boxes, and ballot tracking, saw lower rejection rates than those that didn’t, though we caution against assuming a causal relationship.
  • Previous academic and advocacy research suggests that voters of color, young voters, and first-time voters are disproportionately more likely to have their mail ballots rejected.

We highlight these trends and suggest further areas of study that researchers, advocates, organizers, and policymakers can explore to better understand how voters casting their ballots by mail can ensure their votes are counted.

More from this Program

Empowering Affected Interests: Democratic Inclusion in a Globalized World
Cover photo of Empowering Affected Interests

Book

Empowering Affected Interests: Democratic Inclusion in a Globalized World

Empowering Affected Interests explores the radical implications of the All-Affected Principle—the idea that all those impacted by collective decisions should have a say—by bringing together leading theorists to debate how democracy can address the interdependence of states, markets, and peoples on issues like immigration, climate change, and labor markets.

‘Both parties now can claim the mantle of a multiracial electorate’
Harvard faculty and fellows sit in front of a classroom of students.

Feature

‘Both parties now can claim the mantle of a multiracial electorate’

From global election trends to inflation anger, swing state performance, and failed voting reform initiatives, Harvard election law experts break down last week’s presidential election and what it might mean for the future of American democracy.

More on this Issue

Empowering Affected Interests: Democratic Inclusion in a Globalized World
Cover photo of Empowering Affected Interests

Book

Empowering Affected Interests: Democratic Inclusion in a Globalized World

Empowering Affected Interests explores the radical implications of the All-Affected Principle—the idea that all those impacted by collective decisions should have a say—by bringing together leading theorists to debate how democracy can address the interdependence of states, markets, and peoples on issues like immigration, climate change, and labor markets.

‘Both parties now can claim the mantle of a multiracial electorate’
Harvard faculty and fellows sit in front of a classroom of students.

Feature

‘Both parties now can claim the mantle of a multiracial electorate’

From global election trends to inflation anger, swing state performance, and failed voting reform initiatives, Harvard election law experts break down last week’s presidential election and what it might mean for the future of American democracy.

Election 2024: Appreciating The Front-Line Workers of Democracy

Commentary

Election 2024: Appreciating The Front-Line Workers of Democracy

As the dust settles from the U.S. presidential election, the American public can celebrate that the election process was largely nonviolent and smooth. However, it is important that the public not be lulled into thinking this signals the end of election administrators’ problems.